reporter daniel douglas talks about the protection bureau's annual report. "washington journal" is next. host: the lead story in this morning's "washington post," -- sequestration may be at hand. good morning and welcome to the washington journal. in this edition of the washington journal we begin by talking about congress passing a bill to ease flight delays. we want to get your input. here are the numbers.

as always you can reach out to less obvious social media. the conversation is always going on at facebook.com. you can always send us an e- mail, address is journal@c- span.org this is the way the story reads in this morning's "washington post," --

we want to get your input, again the numbers are -- this is the way the story is being played on this morning's wall street journal --

our first call regarding congress passing the bill to ease flight delays comes from bruce in chicago, illinois on our line for republicans. good morning. talk about the bill passed by the house and whether or not this is going to keep you away from work air travel this year. caller: it will not keep me away. it just amazes me that these people, the president can walk in with a suggestion and everyone voted for the sequestration. but people know it is coming and they cannot deal with it in a business like manner. who is makes you wonder

running this thing. it is really horrendous the way these people act and the things they do. had a chance to travel since the sequestration went into effect? caller: i do not travel and i do not travel that much. when you see all the wasted money like in pennsylvania and the smaller airports, one of them in bloomington, illinois, i am sure they can get along with less people. host: we will move on to bob in wheat field, indiana on our line for independents. good morning. caller: i am calling because i do not think the u.s. taxpayer should have to pay for air traffic controllers in the first place. peopl don't fly -- that fly maybe need to pay a

surcharge. the airlines that are making money any way should foot the bill for this whole thing. but this cannot understand why -- i just cannot understand why we take this out of the general budget. host: are you concerned about the continuity between airports if the air traffic control system goes into the private sector as opposed to being run by the government? caller: in my opinion they treat the air traffic controllers run by the government and put of feed on people from both sides. host: kathy is calling on our line for democrats. caller: thank you for taking my

call. i just wanted to make a comment that i think this is crazy. this could have all been prevented. resident obama is -- i hope you don't cut me off. i do not understand why the united states citizens are letting this happen to them. all of the threats that are going on by our president -- host: we are going to leave it there. this is the lead story in this morning's "miami herald," -- back to the phones, nickel in mandeville, new york on our line for republicans. tired of being

treated like a child. we areernment thinks stupid people. they are using and abusing us. host: that is nicole in mandeville, new york. our next call comes from jolt from tension ville -- a jolt from trenton bill, new jersey. quietly repeals the congressional insider trading ban. it is stopped trading on the congressional knowledge and it seems to congress has come together in a bipartisan way to appeal the disclosure of the amounts of money they make on this insider knowledge of stock trading. i think it might be a concern for the american people. i just cannot imagine how people engage -- you have your democrats line and your republican line and your

independent line when i do not see a difference anymore between democrat or republican. it is just ideologies that they the peopleo give some false sense of -- i don't know. i am just sharon my thoughts. host: joel in trenton, new jersey. house seeks to approve a bill that would end flight delays. weisman writes --

mark in eureka, california is on our line for democrats. you are on the "washington journal." i felt it was not right to restore the cuts for air- traffic controllers and some of

the military but not restore the cuts for the majority of the people that need it -- cancer patients, people getting food stamps. haveepublicans seem to won because obama has caved in again. pain but theel the rich people do not, again. host: we have a couple of tweets. the first one comes from florida gordon --

we are talking about congress passing a bill to ease flight delays. our next call comes from marty in dayton, ohio. caller: i was under the impression that the house -- the flexibility to arrange the sequester as he needed to long ago before he shut down the white house for tours right over spring break when eighth eirders are coming for th spring trip, he closes the doors.

it seems like he tried to target those services that would get .he biggest backlash host: thank you for your call. next up is brett in claremore, oklahoma on our line for independents. caller: thank you for taking my call. i think it is about time that the congress and the senate and everybody got together and did something that made some sense. ofefully this is the start -- they need to get together and fix the rest of things that are in lock-in in congress. host: assuming that this move is faa,d with regards to the

what do you think is the next thing that congress needs to tackle in order to take care of some of these sequestration problems? caller: that as a long list. i think they need to get their heads together and come up with a compromise on the budget. they need to do away with sequestration altogether. host: in the jump page of this morning's "washignton post," they write -- we want to show you a little bit more about what rep latham had

to say on the floor of the house. he's the chairman of the appropriations transportation subcommittee. [video clip] >> i think we all agree that the faa and administration has handled this question poorly. the faa has negotiated in bad faith with the faa employees, the airlines, the flying public, and the congress. the administration has played shameful politics with sequestration at a cost of hard working american families. as i have often said, this is simply no way to run a government. congress is stepping in to correct the problems created by this administration's in action. we are taking the step because of the gross mismanagement of this important function for the safety of all americans who fly and on behalf of the commerce that depends on reliable air system. host: we are talking about congress passing a bill to ease flight delays. our next call comes from

rockford, illinois. mike is on our line for democrats. caller: good morning. thank you for "washington journal." i thoughts on faa -- believe they are going to be privatized along with our schools and post office. the question is what is next? the police department? the fire department? those are my thoughts. host: that is mike in rockford, illinois. " articleashington post --

this was on the floor of the house of representatives yesterday, he is the ranking democrat on the appropriations transportation subcommittee. he is responding to representatives latham about how the sequestration came about. [video clip] ,> i would tell my friend chairman latham, that we agree on one thing, and this is the notion that this is not a good way to run a government. but i have to remind him and all of my colleagues that a year and a half ago we were in this house in this chamber talking about the budget control act.

about a year and a half ago we had a vote. support the legislation because i felt that sequestration was a bad idea. the house passed the bill. the senate passed the bill. and the president signed it. host: we continue our discussion regarding congress passing a bill to ease flight delays. our next call comes from ryan in new castle, pennsylvania on our line for democrats. you are on "washington journal." caller: thank you. i think passing the bill for the faa a thing is utterly disgusting when you think about the fact, as an earlier caller said, head start kids are getting cut, cancer patients -- i think it is time the democrats stand up for something.

what ends up happening is they all agree on the sequester, which is opposed because all the way around, a couple months later the democrats get exactly the things they want. someone has to be the grownups to keep the economy running. it has been going on for so many years with the republicans getting what they want. at this point the democrats have to stand for something. they should not have done this. they do it all the time. as an earlier caller said, there is almost no difference between the parties. the republicans always get what they want, no matter how many members they have. it has been going on forever. i think that it should just stop. they all agreed to the cuts all the way around and then they go back and reinstate the ones they do not want on the republican side and democrats agree to it. it is disgusting. at this point i would want to

stand up for something. i would not even care of the critic of the economy -- i would not even care if the economy goes. they wanted.ay that is the way it is. it is just so sickening to me. host: we are going to move onto robins in new york, just outside of buffalo, on our line for republicans. you are on the "washington journal." . caller: the president asked for the sequestered. he got a sequestered. toe sequester was then used strangle our airline's business. a couple of our republicans with a long with him -- went along with him.

they are not standing up for what they really believed in. i am ashamed of john mccain. i was so happy to see that he was elected in my lifetime to the presidency of the united states. host:more from the "washington write --icle, they le john in new hampshire is on our

line for democrats. you are on "washington journal." caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: i'm calling in regards to the airport situation. of theistening to some other callers. people need to take the time to read the bill on the sequestration. it was designed originally to .e unpalatable for both sides it was so destructive in its nature. it wasn't the president, it was not the republicans, it was not the democrats, it was all of them. it was to force to get them together to put together an actual budget.

if you read the bill, the amount of damage done, when you look at thirdg picture, we have a -- it is aports disaster. host: i want to show you and our other viewers a part of a statement that was made by house minority leader nancy pelosi of today on the floor of the house, talking about sequestration and house she said it amounts to- across the board cuts, in acting safety and national security. we are going to show part of that speech and i want to get your response. "washington journal >> what sequestration?

it is a mindless across-the- board testing of what we are now recognizing and republicans are now recognizing as something that should not be cut. indeed? the efficiency and safety of our airports. -- it be? the efficiency and safety of our airports. efficiencyhe and safety of our airports. the safety of our airports should not be subject to political debate. neither should be the education of our children, the nutrition for our seniors, 4 million meals on wheels, tens of thousands of children thrown off of head tart, our defense, mindless across-the-board cuts.

what that means for national security and workers in our national security sector -- the list goes on and on. ,nvestment in our future biomedical research cut. host: john in new hampshire, your thoughts about what representative pelosi have to say. i totally agree with her interpretation of this. she was part of the problem as well. the democratic party voted for sequestration at the time, as well. ,hen it came time for the votes the democrats did not vote for it. at that time it was too late because the remote -- it was too

late because the republicans had the majority in they pushed it through. it was filibustered in the senate and automatically kicked in as it was designed to do if they cannot come up with a budget resolution, which they did not. host: that was john in new hampshire carried on the front page of "the chicago tribune, " this morning -- you can read more about that online with "the chicago tribune." laverne is on our line for independents. your thoughts about congress passing this bill? caller: i feel it is part of a bigger picture. i had a solution way back about how to contribute to the debt of our country.

hasthat is everyone who paychecks from the federal government tax payers should have a 5% cut. that includes senators, congressmen, senators, representatives, vice-president, anyone who thinks they are exempt from any cuts so they put them on the shoulders of firemen, and teachers, and people of that category. why put it on their backs when it should be the higher ups to take a 5% cut? i think that would help a lot. host: lavern in florida. we have this tweet -- jody is in dallas tx.

good morning. what theasically sequestration and taking money from the airlines -- we had planned this very good and get the government to be it so much and get it so big that it is actually the only way the republican party -- we have to be proud of it. we can cut social security, medicare, and privatize everything because the working people need pay more taxes. the wealthy to not need to pay the tax. there is more pork than wealthy. everyone knows that the wealthy do not need to pay. host: this is one of the editorials in this morning's new york times --

four bob in california on our line for democrats, go-ahead. on thee your thoughts new york times editorial when they say that the democrats share full responsibility for this moment of cowardice? caller: in voting for allowing people to fly and not granting the sequestration money to other signed up fey

this but like so many of our of the promises that we get from our government is broken. said that there was nobody working at the airport until they decided they had to get on an airplane and go to congress -- and go home. broken the ssystem is -- if the system is broken how would you go about fixing it? caller: it is going to take time. the republican party is remodeling itself. it has got itself brand-new young people that believe in a .eal free, open society just let people be free and they always do good things. host: bob in california.

we are pointed take a look at morning.ems in the news this this is a from"the washington post," -- we want to let our viewers know that we are quick to be talking more about the use of chemical weapons in syria later on in the program with colonel cedric leighton, he is a former military intelligence officer and former deputy director of the national security agency. that is coming up in a few minutes. robert from pelton, misery on our line for independents. your honor "washington journal." "washingtonn

journal." caller: what i have noticed is that it inconveniences' the regular people that is okay. it is an inconvenience to our congress, in other words they cannot get home on time, then we have to go and do some emergency make sured twvotes to it happens because we do not like to be affected by the rules we set ourselves. that is the way congress is. they are all about themselves, getting re-elected. i have a question for you. i have been watching for 20 years. i have noticed that the telephone numbers are always republicans and democrats on the .op alternating

the independencts are always on the bottom. we n get on the top of the list. it may be petty but why is that? host: i cannot tell you why that is but it is an interesting point and one will discuss. we want to remind our viewers and listeners and fans of celebrities outside of washington that night is the white house correspondents' dinner. politico put out a special edition of a magazine explaining what is going on this weekend. a guide to the white house correspondents' dinner , articles include "the line blurs between hollywood and d.c." if you do not have a ticket to

partipatealof the activities. you can watch past dinners and watch clips and speeches from tonight. if you miss our live coverage you can watch it on our website, ,hat website is c-span.org/whcd and that will give you all the information you need to know to feel like you are a participant in tonight's white house correspondent dinner. politico put out an article putting talking about the guests that are coming. kidman,des nicole scarlet johansson, shaquille o'neal, kevin spacey, and sofia vergara. -- ifure that you watch you want more information, go to

our web site, c-span.org. eddie in naples, florida on our line for republicans. go ahead. caller: i am an airline pilot. i do not even want to get on my aircraft. i cannot believe the dismantling of the cockpit is going on like it is. it is hurting the pilots, hurting me. i do not want to fly anymore. i am doing all these approaches. i have tremendous amount of pressure and i do not even know if i have runway lights. host: with this vote to bring ,he faa controllers back online is this going to make things easier for you? do you still have concerns about being a pilot? caller: i have major concerns

about the safety of every individual that is behind me. they are depending on me to get them from a to be. if i know that i have got a -- what we have is a failure to communicate in the total government system. the oldgot to kick out crap and get some new blood in there and clean it up. there's no way i can shoot an approach after being in the --pckpit for twelfve hours for twelve hours and know that i do not have runway lights? that means 200 people behind me to not have run lights. we are all over the ground. it is going to be that quick. you are going to see that

pressure up front in the cockpit. now we have to deal with political party decisions see. we need air traffic controllers extreme. the pressure on those people is way beyond mine. host: let me ask you one question. of thishe course conversation it has been suggested that the air traffic control system be put in the hands of the private sector. your thoughts versus private versus government traffic controllers? caller: i find the government traffic controllers the best in the world. i had no fuel and they got the of the crown. me on the ground. this should be put in the hands of the professionals.

host: i am running out of time. i am going to move on to doris in chicago, illinois. caller: people need to realize that republicans have a real hatred of the poor. i have a good bet that the republicans have won the austerity war. they wanted austerity and we the people now live with their want for the austerity. host: katharine in new york on our line for democrats, go ahead. caller: i am so sick and tired -- for three weeks the president told us what was going to happen. these people got what they wanted. from theirget back holiday that they go on three --all the people

need medical health and meals on wheels. can we at least do that for our people instead of this? they had time to call in and complain. i am so sick and tired. please do something. host: this story in "the baltimroore sun," --

in "the wall street journal," -- coming up on this edition of "washington journal," pressure mounts on the reports that syria used chemical weapons on its own people. -- col.leighton col. cedric leighton joins us.

crystal williams joins us later. >> josh stokes is the grand prize winner in this year's c-span's student cam competition. >> come to my hometown of madison, conn and you might find it hard to believe that unemployment is one of the biggest problems in america. a two hour train ride will take into the heart of the united states, downtown manhattan, population 100 600,000. -- 1,600,000. we spoke to a well educated man who lost his job over two years ago and has been looking for work ever since.

this,as guilty of realizing not-- how systemic it is. you start to see addiction issues, marital strife because of all of the things associated with the psychological burden of worry and stress. >> from health, to live in a a home, to not have people over, talk about a domino effect. i cannot begin to tell you. unemployment -- you become unemployable because you have been out of work for so long. >> you have specialized skills and if you do not use those skills they are going to deteriorate. now we are into another vicious circle. if your skills are deteriorating you are not much likely to be

hired again. unemployment is a serious issue because of reasons beyond my paycheck. most people get their health insurance through their jobs. what happens when somebody gets sick? >> i was out of college many years ago. i was diagnosed in 1993 with a lung disease, a systemic disease. you don't have access to the health care that you do. doctors don't want to accept medicaid. wantof them do not anything to do with it. on average u.s. citizens collecting unemployment checks received $300 a week, which adds up to $16,000 per year.

to $15,600.ds up fiveto what little money is left over will be spent on other necessities and unemployed americans will have to resort to borrowing money from friends and family. >> the best social program is a job. it just gives you a paycheck and provided the means to support yourself and your family. more importantly than that it provides dignity and self-worth for people that know that they are contributing and know that they are capable of not being dependent on the government or family or charitable groups. i was one of the founders of a group out of our church.

really has been a blessing. since 2007 we have taken close to two thousand veterans out fishing. in the beginning when i was struggling to look for work, --ore my health ltd. that, before my health ltd. that, i figured i could be very successful at fishing. it is part of my ongoing fight to get disability insurance. they asked me if i was never depressed. exactly a bundle of joy every day. they would likely to see a psychiatrist. i spoke to them and told them of the things i was doing. she said, "do you ever get down?" i said, "of course i get down.

it is a terrible situation to be in, to be unemployed and have no income. my medical assurances in the toilet. i do not feel like doing this down the road >> greater than with the the economy as tight as it has been in the past four years, with the budget shrinking and a great deal of our budget being invested in human- are laying off more and more people. >> what i have saw that is the most difficult things in business is the people that we have been an instrumental part in the growth of our business. i know them personally. i know about their families. it is a very personal thing. >> and unemployment remains a significant problem in the country, even though the news has been better.

>> in the near term there is not a lot of government can do to create jobs. >> this is the worst economic recovery in 70 years. >> the jobless rate has leveled out at just over 8%. >> the united states has lost 40 two thousand factors since 2000 -- 40 two thousand factories since 2001. a the previous record was market of 3 million people. some reliefing for for medical conditions. that is my priority. i still have a lot to offer society. whether that be volunteer work pay a am doing now or commission, i do have something to offer. that is what i hope to do.

♪ >> congratulations to all the winners in this year paul student cam competition. to see more winning videos go studentcam.org. >> "washington journal" continues. >> colonel cedras clinton is a former intelligence officer with the air force. he is here to talk to us about the reported use of chemical weapons in syria. welcome to the program. post," therengton

is the headline -- with your experience as the former to the director of national security -- the former deputy director of national security, what kind of proof is he looking for? >> a whole series of indicators. guest: he is a lawyer by training. he wants the type of proof that can work into a court of law. in the case of intelligence information, sometimes to get pretty good proof and sometimes you get lousy proof. very seldom do you have a chance to have complete, unequivocal, 100% ironclad proof. that is one of the problems intelligence deals with. no matter how difficult it is from our sources, there is

alwa a question of doubt. that makes the scissions for policymakers very difficult -- makes the decisions for policymakers very difficult. that becomes a real problem from that standpoint. he is looking for specific in soilrs -- indicators samples, human tissues, things like that. sarin is a nerve agent. it? very quickly on the human body. the problem is it house has -- it? very quickly on the human body. the problem is it has a very slow shelf life. problem with getting incontrovertible proof. that proof also have to take the form of the types of information that was passed within the chain of command to the syrian army.

and access to that kind of information becomes a matter of tying the different knots together and having fragmentary evidence that can then be pieced together in a mosaic sort, and it gives you an idea of what is out there. host: the article goes on to say that the u.s. followed allies in concluding that chemical weapons were probably used by the syrian regime over the last four months. it added the caveat that the "withment was raisedeached varying degrees of confidence." guest: that is a bureaucratic way of saying "we are not sure." you have different agencies that use different types of intelligence to get to the conclusions that they believe are correct for any particular problem. in this particular case, for

example, you can have the people that do imagery intelligence. they see pictures of things being moved. it could possibly be precursors to the implementation of the user s ofarin gaff -- to the use of saring gas. you may have traffic between various elements of the command structure. some parts of it are more conclusive than others. that creates the issue that you have with whether or not you have a complete agreement or disagreement among the agency. some of the agencies are saying we believe sarin has been used. that is where we are at at this point. host: key lawmakers said that the red line and syria has been crossed, calling for u.s.

intervention after u.s. intelligence officials confirmed that small-scale chemical weapons were used in syria. we are going to discuss this with colonel cedric leighton. we like you to get involved in the conversation. the numbers are on the screen. our first call comes from florida on our line for democrats. you are on "washington journal." caller: good morning. i was calling because our country is in turmoil. there are a lot of things that are going on over here. whether you are talking about weapons of mass destruction with chemical or some rigged up pressure cooker that is destroying people in our own home country -- we are so big untrieslems other coutnrie

have. my mother used to say sweep up your own doorstep before dealing with other people's homes. host: i appreciate that sentiment. guest: the issue is that a lot of what happened in boston -- you look at a lot of different types of people that were involved in that. clearlyrnaev brothers had some degree of influence from their overseas experiences. those experiences tend to color the way they looked at the world. say it case youc an cans basically drove them to what they did. there is no differentiation between what happens overseas and what happens domestically. it doesn't mean we get involved in every single thing that is out there. we have to understand what is

going on and in som cases it becomes necessary in the national interest to get involved to prevent the slaughter of thousands of people. you have 70,000 people that have been killed in the syrian civil war. you have to make a decision as a policymaker, is this in the national interest? is this where i come in and say something or do something? that becomes the key component of how you actually respond to a crisis like that. anyone in a policy-making role realizes that it is a very tough decision. host: we are talking about the reported use of chemical weapons in syria. our next call comes from al on our line for independencts. caller: i would hate to use my 1 month phone call for this issue but here is my opinion on this whole thing -- we don't know

who, what, or where -- anything that is going on in that country. we see pictures on cnn and they are suffering. i have a heart. but here's the thing, we cannot do all of the heavy lifting. why is the united nations not getting involved? the israelis will give you your becausepinion they are on the front lines. why are we going to get involved in there? we need to make sure those chemical weapons are not coming here or to europe. that is the only reason we should be getting involved. no boots on the ground, no no- fly zones. host: we are going to leave it

there. before we get your answer i want ad in this headline that was in this morning "financial times," -- responding to al's call regarding international concerns, tell me why moscow has been put into this discussion. guest: that is a great point. when you look at getting the u.n. involved, the problem is it does not act as a unified body. generally speaking, those countries that are trying to protect another country, for example in the case of syria both russia and china are security council members of the united nations security council. they have veto power over anything that goes on in the un

in terms of resolutions and actual actions that the u.s. does. when you have a situation like this it becomes very difficult for the international community to react because what they are dealing with is try to get consensus among all of these nations. you can make the argument that it is self-evident that because of the suffering going on in syria all nations should jump in and put a stop to the internal fighting that is going on. that would be one argument. but if you get to the idea of why the russians are perhaps put into a corner is the financial times -- into a corner as the financial times" indicated, they have been a longtime ally of syria. they are on the minister iranian coast of syria. it is interest. -- they are on the bed iranian coast of syria. mediterranean coast

of syria. the iranians have one major arab ally. what they are dealing with here is a series -- is a situation where they believe that if the assad government falls they will no longer have access to that military base on the mediterranean. if that military base is no longer open to the russians than they have a difficult time projecting how are -- projecting power beyond international borders. russia pasquale's has been to expand russian power, if not expanded even -- russia hassible -- russell's goals been to expand russian power.

that is one part of the russian strategic focus. the problem they now have is because of the use of chemical weapons -- the possible use of them -- chemical weapons are prohibited by international treaty. if the russians come out and say "we support the assad regime in spite of the use of chemical weapons," that becomes a problem diplomatically for them because it weakens their position when it comes to the chemical weapons use. you have a situation where you have the russians trying to keep the assad regime alive but they do not approve of the use of chemical weapons. as a result of that what they are trying to do is play both sides. they want to keep assad in power. they want to make it possible assad regime to reside or exit

gracefully. that is really where they are going i. chemicalof the use of weapons, that becomes a terrible position for them to hold internationally. it becomes difficult for them to veto any other efforts against host: our next call comes from pennsylvania on our line for democrats. caller: good morning, thank you for cspan. host: go ahead. got to yes, you've establish basic facts. syria is not a threat to the united states.

the first step. this would be a first step in a war with syria. assad thee opposing current government. the fact of the matter is, the aiding the jihadists. these are the people opposing the most powerful opposition to assad. the ultimate objective here is a iran. iran is not a threat to the united states. they don't have a nuclear weapon. we have 5000. we have delivery systems of every major. the israelis are not threatened. they have 100 or more nuclear weapons. what has been overlooked is that these wars in the middle east have been an unmitigated disaste for the united states.

we spent trillions and will be spending trillions in the future. we will span for veterans' disability, veterans' pensions, disability, replacing the military equipment. these are a disaster for us. another factor is that the minorities in syria support the government. there is 2 million christians in syria. host: john's sentiments are rectum -- reflected in this tweet -- is some think there interesting thoughts from john and jan. john mentioned specifically syria and iran were not threats to the u.s. the syrian government is not in a position to directly attack washington or something like that. however, when you look at the types of groups that syria

supports, they are clear supporters of hezbollah, the main organization active in lebanon and is a key antagonist of israel. the israelis see the syrians and hezbollah as a key threat to their existence. we are tied by an alliance to the israelis. look at several different aspects of by iran. will i ran out a conventional attack against the u.s.? it cannot do that. however, it is trying to achieve a nuclear capability it is very clear from a lot of the evidence out there that perhaps they do not have the bomb yet but all of the facilities they are building a test -- the tests they are conducting, the education they give their people in certain engineering skills clearly leads down the path of nuclear preparedness in

a weapons sense, not nuclear power, but nuclear weapons. you also have i ran affecting the interests of other u.s. allies like saudi arabia. the iranians were very concerned with the u.s. efforts in operation iraqi freedom, the iraq war. many of the ied's that were implanted in iraq during 2003- until our exit from iraq, were actually the work of the iranians. they worked very carefully with their interests -- intelligence services. they had brought his within iraq to not only deploy but also to detonate a lot of ied's that were used against u.s. servicemen. the iranians are basically fighting what is known as

asymmetric warfare against the united states. it is not a hot war but it is a war that takes its toll little by little incrementally across the spectrum of the events. that is why the iranian situation and the iranian connection to syria is the key reason why this serious situation is in our strategic interest to work through and to solve in concert with other nations and to be very careful how we proceed. it is true that many of the folks that we would be supporting potentially in the free syrian army in syria are or associatedists with al-qaeda in various ways. that is a very dangerous situation and it points to the sheer complexity of the situation in the middle east and the difficulties of getting involved in a place that creates a lot of problems not only for the people that live there but people coming in to situationk the power

from a nation state perspective. host: here is another tweet -- guest: we are not certain that assad responsible for the use -- the alleged use of seron gas syria. there are two places it was used and one was near the damascus and one was there a lot of. aleppo. we're not specify certain that he directed best. as far as we know, control of seron gas is only within the hands of syrian government forces. they are a centralized control- ise military where there

limited decentralized execution. the orders come from on high and that means basically that the lowest echelon will take orders from the top through layers of bureaucracy. the indications bureaucratically and from the intelligence perspective and others are that, in this particular case, the most likely culprit would be the syrian government. as far as limited use, what does that mean? it was not very effective. it was used apparently 15 people died as a result of the dispensing of seron gas in these two incidents. as tragic as that is, that is a relatively low death toll compared to what happened with seron gas would points to several things. it could be that the sero stockpilesn and syria are so old that they cannot -- they might have lost their shelf life and

because of that, they may not be as effective as what they originally intended. that is, in one sense, the way in which this kind of situation is a limited use of chemical weapons. the decision must now be made it do we go in on a limited use of chemical weapons or are we waiting for world war i-styles and there were thousands of people potentially die. that was trench warfare and civilian effecter fairly limited, but mass of the facts, a huge health and to -- implications for those affected. or that to be used against civilians like iraq, that could be a big change in the way we look at these things. host: are talking about the use of chemical weapons and syria and our guest is l colonel cedric leighton.

back to the fundsron in california are line for republicans. you arecolonel leighton talking to a tec-4 army. i want you to understand this is coming from. where are the witnesses? where is the cell phone evidence of these 16 dead people? we want to see what is going on as well as the president does. winnie corroboration and verification and there is no reason to go in there and do a bunch of stuff. , chemicalm hussein picturesed the kurds and eyewitnesses to tell the tale. there are no eye witnesses in this case and we don't have a who is inleader person

syria that we can go to. weeed to find that leader that will go into a third party country and discuss the evidence at hand. guest: that's an excellent point. thank you for your service. my dad was in the army for 20 years so i appreciate all that you did. that is an excellent point. as far as specific evidence, a lot of that is going to be classified when it comes to these 15 or 16 people who were specifically killed in this particular way a lot of that depends on pathological evidence. in human tissue samples and blood samples. that may be hard to get because of access issues with syria. andatnte the sub-comm

issue, that is indicative of the issue in syria because the free syrian army as a leadership problem and externally. we find it very difficult to hang our hat on any particular individual. not that we would want to, but because of the way that organization is structured or not structured, there are very few folks who we can say this is the one we would go to. we have to be careful with that. our experience, as you know, with folks in countries like this has not been, let's say, 100%. host: earlier this week on intelligence committee ranking member talked about the house briefing on syria and action going forward. [video clip] >> we feel there has been some chemical weapons that have been used but we are still investigating. who did it and where it is

coming from and now we are intee committee ranking member in an evaluation stage. one of the important issues is that we need to bring together the other countries and work as a team. host: that was the house intelligence committee ranking member. we also got this tweet -- guest: that is one of those things where intelligence always has a difficult time proving things that are there. it is an issue of access and gathering the information but also analyzing the information that is out there. the parts that you don't see are generally very successful. the intelligence apparatus does very well in terms of informing people if we are very specific. it's very good when it comes to specific military engagement. where it is less able to work

through things is when we are dealing with nuance, trying to determine in tent or trying to find who is doing what to whom and what the cause of the facts and motivations are. that has always been a difficult thing. sometimes, we don't know ourselves what we will do next. if you're trying to figure that out for another person or another person in another culture, that is a significant difficulty just because of the nature of human beings. onis also a difficulty based how we can assess things in our understanding of places around the world. the intelligence we have is generally very good. fortunately, you don't see the successes but you will certainly know about the failures. the intelligence community always has a very interesting time explaining itself and public. host: our next call comes from perth amboy, new jersey, on airline for independents. caller: good morning, gentlemen.

i want to specify some terms. when you use the term "national security"for national interests," that always encompasses the military industrial intelligence corporate complex. sometimes, it encompasses the interest of the american people they are more interested in education and meals on wheels and headstart and the social programs. that you'reu prove not as part of a psychological operation conditioning us and making us afraid and being fearful of the syrian use of chemical weapons by detail your knowledge of the use of united states chemical weapons in various wars of the past like, for example, agent orange in vietnam and cia bio experiment- in florida and lsd released in the new york city subways.

why don't you talk about that search and establish your credibility? host: what would be the purpose of the colonel making people afraid of what is in syria? caller: is conditioning us to have another war and fight against other people in other parts of the world where we have no essential interests. like chemical weapons are so bad, how about killing people with regular bullets? that is awful, too. guest: here is the way i look at it -- you mentioned agent orange and lsd experiment done by the cia in the past. luckily, that was before my time and, quite frankly, if i had an inkling that anything like that was going on when i was in the military, i would have resigned. there are different times, different rules, different places that these things did occur the current situation is a

much different situation when it comes to this. i don't personally approve of the use of agent orange. i don't approve of lsd other drug experiments on human subjects. i stand by that and would always stand by that. in terms of syria, there are certain things that are eight key elements. i am not part of a so-called military industrial complex. i provide independent advice in my current capacity as an independent consultant. i did not work directly with defense contractors. i do not do things on behalf of the u.s. military at this point although i did enjoy my service. i thought it was a noble calling in this particular situation, what you're looking at is understanding what the world is all about. in order to secure things such as the social programs he spoke about, you need to have a means of doing so. the national security apparatus

of the united states is designed to do that, to provide that security so that people can enjoy the benefits of living in this country. that is really what this is all about. in terms of what happens next in places like syria, it is only through a dialogue that is done in front of the american people that we can achieve a consensus as to what to do next. the national security complex you talk about is paid for by the american people and it is employed by the american people, all of us who have sworn to uphold the constitution when reserve in the military are responsible to the american people and the constitution for our conduct. that is something that remains inviolate. we tried our best as an institution to make that work for us. that is really what this is all about, to try to make this work for the american people on behalf of the american people. host: in "the new york times" --

we want to show you what the president had to say during this meeting with the king of jordan and we will get a response. [video clip] potentiallyhat chemical weapons have been used inside of syria doesn't tell us when there were used or how they were used. need confirmation and strong evidence. all those things, we have to make sure we work on with the international community. we, ourselves, are putting resources in focusing on this. a line has been crossed when we see tens of thousands of innocent people being killed by a regime.

the use of chemical weapons and the dangers that poses to the international community, to neighbors' of syria, the potential for chemical weapons to get into a hands of terrorists -- all those things add increased urgency to what is already a significant security problem and humanitarian problem in the region. addition to the jordanians, who are the other allies that the u.s. can look to in trying to resolve this situation without necessarily having to put u.s. troops on the grounds? guest: the jordanians are a prime example but you're looking at turkey which shares the northern border with syria and as a member of nato. because of that connection, the turkish government is very interested in what is happening in syria and seized it as a national security issue for that

country. the other thing about turkey as with jordan is that they have a significant syrian refugee problem. each of these countries has a significant stake in resolving the conflict, not just for that reason, but a reason for preventing a refugee exodus into their countries because that would affect their fragile economies. walz of saudi arabian and qatar the united arab emirates. all of these countries have diplomatic reasons. are qataris and saudis arming be freed syrian army and are keenly interested in getting rid of assad cause of his eye iranian connection and anything they can do to minimize the iranian inference in the arab world is something in their national interest. those are some of the key allies in that part of the world. when you expand that into europe, you have the french and

the british who also have both historical and economic interests in the middle east. they look at the serious situation as being detrimental to their national interest, their economic interests, and also their humanitarian interests. host: you mentioned the armond the free syrian army. guest: there is a chance and that is an excellent question. that's where you have to make a decision when you work a policy issue like this. is quite regime bristle. -- brutal. they are key proponents of the use of torture. they do that on the wrong people and their political opponents. they also harbor groups that are opposed to israel. not are not a good actor,

to mention the iranian port. is, if,r side of that as the current events indicate, the free syrian army, if they take over syria, what happens next? we don't really know who they are. we know some elements of them. we know there are some elements that are in favor of a more secular approach to problems of the middle east. the problem with that is, any party of the center politically is going to have a very difficult time getting popular support and having the charismatic leaders that are necessary to take a country like syria from a broken state into a feature that would be viable for that country. syria has so many diverse ethnicities and diverse religious group things that becomes very hard to see how one can glue all back together, absent teh assad regime.

i am not in favor of assad those are the type of things one has to consider. the devil that you know is somebody that you have some understanding of. the devil that you don't know is when you have to establish that understanding of. that is the double park right now. host: we're talking with colonel cedric leighton. from joe inl comes ash, north carolina, on airline for republicans. , you have tory learn from history and either from the hittites, the persians, ottomann empire, the empire -- everybody has been killing themselves even during the first world war when the british came in and push the ottoman empire apart which is

turkey now. they still killed each other. then the british took over and the french took it over and they got their bottoms thrown out. you must leave these people alone till they come to the fact that they will not kill each other. europe did the same thing. they used to attack each other and to each other. they quit when they realized it was a non sequitur. they cannot win. has this tweet -- guest: i don't think it caused a power struggle but i think it may have inadvertently added fuel to the fire. the power struggle is going to end happen. the key thing about joe's history peace -- it is true,

these folks have been killing each other for thousands of years. the problem that you have if you try to impose the european model on this or get them to realize there is a european model out there, they know that intellectually, but in their hearts is a different issue. when it comes to the european model, the reasons the europeans are not fighting each other like they did for thousands of years before 1945, is that the united states stepped in and provided the europeans with a framework, the marshall plan, so they could have the economic development they needed to get to the place eeefore the second world war. from there, they developed the institutions that are now are known as the european union. that kind of union has been a goal of many arab movements. in egypt, -- syria and egypt were one country at one time

known as the united arab republic in the 1960's which is a short-lived experiment. this is an hour version of establishing a unified state for all arab peoples. the problem with that is it is not a reality. something like that becomes a reality and the basis is a peaceful understanding and mutual cooperation and less on an ethnic tension that exists in areas of therian country. you will not find the kind of framework being established in the arab world. it is regrettable but unfortunately, until they get to that point, the killing will continue. unfortunately, then getting to that point is, in my view, a long way off. adam smith ofman washington, the top democrat on the house armed services committee is our guest this weekend on "newsmakers."

he discussed how the house and senate approached syria and how they seem to differ. [video clip] >> on the house side, we have been more cautious about the notion of this being a horrible situation and what can we do? we are not in a position to go in there and fix the problem. it is a lesson learned in iraq and afghanistan. u.s. military might alone does not automatically solve and make a peaceful situation. we have limitations. u.s. has been involved in providing humanitarian aid in working with jordan and other partners in the region to figure out what we can do to help the legitimate rebels. that is a tough question. we don't want to be arming al qaeda. i think there is openness on the house to potentially working with partner nations, to arm the right set of rebels and figuring out who that is remains elusive. i think it's a more cautious

approach. for all the rhetoric out of the senate, when it comes down to specifics, what should we do? you talk about a no-fly zone. the implications of doing a no- fly zone and syria are overwhelming. the military would have to commit, the losses that we would sustain, the war that we would be engaged in in doing that, is really pretty extensive. host: representative adam smith is our guest on "newsmakers"this weekend and you could see the entire interview sunday morning at 10:00 a.m. and again at 6:00 p.m. and available online at c- span.org. i want to add this to wait -- to fight,we're going we'll fight as a unified nation and that will be the key thing.

we're not in a position i now were there is unity between republicans and democrats but .lso the house and senate there are elements in the senate like senator mccain, that seemed to be very much in favor of cell -- establishing a no-fly i will take issue with the comment about establishing the no-fly zone having been involved in that in iraq. the no-fly zones are somewhat difficult to establish but they are not impossible. from an air sense force perspective? are you going to keep planes on the ground? will it cover the entire nation or is it going to cover sectors of that nation? will it be effective as far as the people we are trying to help? there are a lot of different things that are out there, a lot of factors to consider but it is

not impossible to do. you have to have the intelligence and a willingness to make that happen. host: our next call comes from north portman -- north fort myers, florida. have been listening to everybody. only the gentlemen are speaking. i think you need a female, too. listening to one the issue of said areical weapons in syria -- host: are you still with us? caller: the united nations should get involved. it is not only the u.s. it is ability --

worldwide problem now. guest: i would not disagree with that. the united nations was established to handle these kinds of events, to handle the kind of fighting you see in syria, to handle issues like rwanda in the 1990's. the un.the job of the problem is that the u.n. has not stepped up to the plate because there are some money invested interest in play at the un. the u.n. to use leverage their power plays and to establish a means of power projection in a diplomatic sense. that is the kind of stuff that has to be worked through. if you want to make the u.n. more effective, that is the kind of stuff that has to be put on the sideline if the u.n. is going to do what it was intended to do. host: we have been talking about

the use of chemical weapons in syria with colonel cedric leighton, former military intelligence officer in the air force and former deputy director of the national security agency. thank you for being on the program. guest: thank you for having me. host: coming up next on journal," crystala williams talks about the visa process. beer danielle douglas will here to talk about the latest actions by the consumer financial protection bureau. we will be right back. ♪

>> this weekend, before the white house correspondents' dinner we will show select dinners from the past three administrations. a live coverage of this year's dinner, starting with a red carpet arrivals. on thursday, dedication of the torch of you push library and museum. >> they want to describe the library as an act of faith. i dedicate this library with unshakable faith in the kefeatue of our country. whatever challenges come before us i will always believe our nation's best days lie ahead. god bless. >> son the morning at 10:30. -- sunday morning at 10:30.

,"an2's "book tv donovan campbell. kioskent into the little and i said i am here to report. the guard said he knew what of my campaign managers in ohio. we got down in there and the guard said i had some hate mail. it was from california and massachusetts. they gave me the mail. you go to the most embarrassing part of the stripped down. i walked into prison, down into the courtyard. the warden will not use the language i do in the book. i am sitting there not knowing where to go, what to say.

prisoner asked for my escort was. suit yelps guy in a and foul language. he took me into the back of the locker room. and ask if i there am the congressman. republican,u are a aren't you? " i said, "republicans put me in here." more with former ohio congressman bob ney, sunday at &a." on c-span's "q "washington journal" continues.

all is a visa and are foreign nationals required to obtain them? off one is the common parlance and one is the legal term. it is almost like a ticket that you get as a u.s. consulates abroad. you presented at the doors of the united states. the immigration officer looks at it and says "your ticket is good, i will let you in the," or "i am not letting you in." you have entered in a status of some kind. the next time you travel out of the united states your visa comes in. visa, once he an h-

is here he is here. not everybody has to he a decent. -- past have a visa. there is a list of thirtysomething countries called the sub-waiver countries. -- called the sub-waiver countries. if you are pumping temporarily just for a visit or for terrorism or for business you to not need a visa. >> what is the difference between a visa and passport? guest: passport is what your country issues to you that enables you to travel internationally. a visa is actually issued by .he other country's consulate that country is saying they will let you in. if you are an american and you

want to go to china you take your american passport and you go to the chinese consulate and you get a visa. that is for china. >> do you need a passport to get a visa? guest: generally, yes. but not always. canadians do not necessarily have to have a passport. most countries require a passport to enter the united states. host: how long does it take to get a visa? guest: it depends. it can take one day in certain countries to give a visitor's country. it can take years to get a working visa. it varies. host: take us through the screening process for those applying and what kind of background checks are involved.

guest: it depends on what kind of these to you are getting. if you are coming as a visitor and it is one of those visa- waiver countries it is the lightest check we have. essentially you fill out a screen on a computer. there is a relatively quick check of the different criminal security databases if you are coming for longer-term they're going to run you through a more rigid through a few more background checks. areou stay permanently you calling to run through a lot of security checks. the final check as you come to the gate is you give your fingerprint. host: we're talking about how the u.s. traveler's the system works with crystal williams.

she is the executive director of the american immigration lawyers association. if you would like to get involved, the number is on the stream -- the numbers are on the screen. we have a special line for the stockholders. 3883.number is 202-585- crystal williams, we want to show our viewers and non- immigrant temporary visas. take us through some of the ones we appoint a look at. the first one is a be-the sun, visitors for business or e forre, f for students, keaty trader or investor, and

citizen.e of a u.s. if you want to contemporarily you have to prove that you are really intending to contemporarily and you get one of these the says, depending on what you want to do when you get here, from the alphabet soup. that thesisdo with as you are going to do and not do the things that the sec says you should not do. if you come as a visitor -- things that the sec says he should not do. if you come as a visitor you had better not work. if you work while on a b visa we can throw you out. is there a time limit on the b-visa? guest: paris.

do not be deceived by your visa. many people get a visa good for 10 years. they present that visa at the point of entry and the officer llslst hem how longth -- te them how long they can stay. if they come as a visa-waiver visitor they generally stay up to 90 days. host: our first call for christa williams comes from gary in jacksonville, alabama on our line for democrats. go ahead. are you there? let's move on to elizabeth in naples, florida on our line for independents. have to european community -- people only get a

three-month visa coming to the united states. i have met so many people that have come into the united states, have stayed there, have not left any more. i have seen this everywhere. a lot of russians and romanians. they are able to get employment, i do not know how, but they get employment. they are in open places everywhere. i would like to know how this is handled. people are coming in who are pregnant and having their children here. they are not residents of the united states and the children get legal status. the children are now americans. they do not even come into the

united states anymore. they come in five years later. i see this all the time. why non-residents -- they should not be coming here in their last week's price -- their last week of pregnancy. back to that to go alphabet soup. we talked about the visitor's the center which you cannot work. there are a number of different pieces under which you can work and you must do the work that is specific to that the set. -- to that visa. if you are coming in under a e- visa, that is a treaty trader be set. if you are conducting trade with the united states you may be able to work under that. we do not have an of time to

name all of them. there are a number of different circumstances under which foreign nationals can work in the united states just as there are circumstances under which u.s. citizens can work in other countries. without looking at each individual situation i can say they may be authorized to work in teh united states temporarily or permanently. we do hear reports people coming here to give birth. it is not that, of the practice. the airline will not let you on the plan when you are terribly close to giving birth. that is one matter. it is not something a lot of people do. the baby is a u.s. citizen, the parent is nothing. not petition to get the parent residence until the child is 20 years old. nobody comes here to get

themselves a legal status by giving birth. we have heard sporadic reports every so often of somebody coming here, having a baby, and that baby is a u.s. citizen. host: in our conversation, to remember we have a special line for the stockholders. -- for visa holders. our next call comes from stephanie in misery on our line for democrats. the mall for waiting. caller: good morning. if an individual comes to the united states, obtaining a visa, and whichever one day and may be coming for, if they do come on the visa what protocol isn't that once they are severe, as you say, when they get to the doors of the united states they are given the time to remain in

the united states. what protocol happens when that person has overstayed their time? exactly what occurs at that point? guest: good question. it is going to depend a lot on what the subtypes they came in on. if they came in as a student. -- if they came in as a student, there is a computed system where student activity is monitored. every university that issues the papers that enables a student to toe to yo the united states study is called the responsible officer. computer into the system with the student is doing. has the student left? has he completed his or her studies?

that is monitored through the computer system. , they are to come in monitored whent hey enter the united states. when the exit the turn in the card they were given when they changed -- when they entered the united states. centrald is sent to a data input place and that is entered into the system as well. what happens is if that part is that it entered into the system and the time has ended and the system shows that that person is an overstay. whether-up on the somebody is an overstay -- what happens is that person then leaves the country tries to come back into the united states. the system will show the overstayed. they will generally be barred

from the united states or have to overcome a bar in order to come back in. somebody-- sometimes did not enter their cardin. host: our next call comes from genet in pittsfield, illinois on our line for republicans. go ahead. caller: i would like to know what planet miss williams is living on. she has no idea, she can not tell us anything other than it is entered nitointo a computer. these people are coming here and saying they are a student, worker, etc. and they get a job stay here for 14 years. how does this person get here?

know if they are th going to stay here legally, but thanks to the dream act we are going to pay for their children. host: kenya first confirm that you are from the planet -- can you first confirm that you are from the planet earth? guest: i have been accused of being martian. there is a full deportation system and we see people in that deportation system all the time. on my planet people are reported with some frequency. the dream act, which has not ton enacted, does not speak who goes to college and who does not go to college and who pays for it.

it speaks to individuals who were brought here as children, who have never known anything but the united states as their home, and says "these are americans." talk to them. ow what we need to do is acknowledge that they are americans. is john from virginia on our line for independents. go ahead. guest: my daughter is chinese and i adopted her in this country. it says she has all the rights of a natural born citizen on her papers. get a visa and cannot go to china. host: repeat that last part. her and shedopted is our legal daughter and papers

say she has all the rights of a natural born citizen. she has two children which were born here. she is not allowed to go to china and the comeback. -- to china and to come back. guest: she would be allowed back to the united states but whether or not she is allowed into china is up to chinese law. i do not know what their laws are on the particular point. every country has the right to decide who does and does not enter that country. if china is not issuing her a states she is a united citizen even if she was born in china. therefore china's laws may not acknowledge her as a chinese citizen. daughter hasopted not gone through the national process? caller: correct.

host: how long has she been here? caller: 15 years. host: why hasn't she become a citizen? undocumentedas when she came here. we went to the court, we adopted says shethe course as st has all rights. if she leaves here she cannot get a visa. host: she cannot get a visa to visit china or to return to u.s.? caller: to go to china. she is afraid she will not be able to come back into this country. guest: i am going to have to advise you to consult with an attorney. there are things that do not connect their. i think you do need to have an

attorney look specifically at her case. a does sound like she has certificate of citizenship. but just over the phone i cannot speak to that. if you find an attorney that specializes in these issues there is a recurring service alilawyer.com host: next up is sabo calling from maryland, who has a visa. c-span. thank you for i come from the beautiful republic of cameroon. public health by pate in aap partici

conference. i was refused a visa because i did not have money in my bank account. secondly, i want to find out on -- for u.s. citizens it is written on their passport but they shall not be -- thank you. get anefore we answer, what kind of beast are you on? dv visa.i am on the host: thanks for your call. guest: i didn't hear what you said about written on u.s. citizen's passports.

passport ofhe u.s. citizens it is stated that when they are travelling they --ll not be entitled or on our list of the immigrant categories the dv- visa is for lottery winners. is that how you got your visa? caller: yes. tothe previous attempt attend a conference that was sponsored by my organization, the ambassador turned down my application. the lotteryplain how

system works. guest: each year there are 55,000 visas. -- if you're from -- and into the slot 3. the odds of being chosen are a little better than leaving -- better than winning a $30 million. if you meet certain minimal criteria and you are chosen for the slot 3 then you can get a green card and reside permanently in the united states. most countries in the lottery are african countries because there is not immigration to the united states from the continent of africa. some asian countries and a few european countries -- it is a visa category that has a tendency to skew toward africa.

chris williams is the executive director of the american immigration lawyers association. organizationrofit and an association of over 11,000 attorneys and law professors who practice and teach immigration law. residence for close family members, as well as business seeking talent for the local market base. it also represents students, a detainers, athletes, often on a pro bono basis. clarence in omaha, nebraska on our line for democrats. like to knowld what type of visa retired military and their spouses would have to get. host: would that be a military

person who was in cage to a foreign national? caller: a military person who is been in the military or is in -- i was in the army and i was here in the united states and i want to go over to germany or france for vacation. it allows retired military what type of visa -- if i was retired military what type of visa would i need? about if you are talking a visa to the united states generally the military will not accept individuals that are not citizens of the united states. therally if you are in

military you probably are a permanent resident or a citizen. if your spouse is a foreign national, you would petition for her if you are a u.s. citizen. it is called the immediate relative category which is the fastest way to get somebody a green card. if you are a permanent resident, you would petition for her under one of the preferences for spouses of lawful permanent residence. there is a weight on that. if you're talking about a u.s. citizen member of the military wanted to go to another country, it will be up to the laws of the other country what kind of the said you need or if you need one. host: our next call is from oklahoma, are republican . my question is about the individuals coming to the united states to have children. how much would it affect the

immigration -- illegal immigration problem is they were to make it so that the children cannot automatically become u.s. citizens unless one of the parents are citizens or they are making application for citizenship? guest: i think it would have ze pact on illegal immigration nobody comes here in order to get legal status through their children because they cannot. canonly time a child petition for a parent is once the child turns 21. very few people have the patience to wait 21 years. that is not why you come here illegally. you come here illegally to work, to make a better life for your family, and you come here illegally because there really isn't a pathway for people, particularly those lower-

skilled, to come here legally. it really would have zero impact. there is the small matter of the 14th amendment of the constitution. host: from riverdale, maryland. caller: how are you doing? were host: kind of visa caller: do you have i have a b-2 visa it has expired. host:yes? caller: this is my problem -- a lot of people think that people want to come here and they don't want to go back which is false. sometimes we come here by mistake. when i came here, wanted to go to school and everything. then i stayed in new york for a long time. algiers because my uncle was an ambassador there

and i came here, my objective was to go to school but the money i had to pay for school came from my auntie to pay my rent they never allowed me to stay with them. i went hell trying to survive until my visa expired. that i did not want to waste all my prospects on trying to go back because there was no need of going back. if i go back, i would not be able to come to the united states again. host: technically, you are undocumented? now 15, 16, it is years. host: on documented? caller: yes. host: here is a suite -- --tweet - - guest: close to half are

overstays. there is a popular image that everyone here who is on documented is from mexico. that is simply not the case. most are overstated. host: if you overstay your visa and you don't want to go back -- it expires, do you have to go back to your country of origin to get the visa extended or renewed? guest: yes, you do. with one narrow exception -- if you want to regain little present legal status of the united states, you have to go back to your home country and you have to convince the consulate to issue new suv said. if you have overstayed for a lengthy period of time, you of a very difficult time convincing the consulate to issue you a new visa because they will say that you overstate last time, what

makes me think you will not do the same thing again? if you are eligible for a permanent visa for a green card, in order to get that green card, you probably will have to go back to your home country and you will have to be eligible. if you over state for more than 180 days, you will have to stay out for three years. if you overstayed by more than one year, you will have to stay out for 10 years. there's a very strict rule about how long you over state and what the repercussions can be. the one exception is if you are married to a u.s. citizen and you overstayed a visa, you can adjust your status to permanent residence without going home. and without being subject to penalties if you don't leave. that one narrow exception is if

you are married to a u.s. citizen. if you entered illegally, that exception does not apply you are still subject to going home and subject to those bars. there are some waivers available but they are hard to get host: among the non-immigrant temporary immigranth the says, the one that comes up for discussion the most is the h1b, special to the occupation -- $65,000 -- 65,000 or 20,000. . talk to us about these worker vises and why they are so much -- there is so much progress on the h1b visa guest: that is for

professionals. it is titled specialty occupation but it is really professionals in an occupation that have a specialization elements. people think of it as a high- tech visa but it goes well beyond that. there is a mixture of people who are here working on this visa. it is a work-authorized a visa. it can be software engineers. it can be civil engineers. it can be teachers. it can be doctors. it can be marketing professionals. there is a whole battery of people who fall under this umbrella. one reason it is controversial is that quite a few -- because of the mix of people and the fact that only 65,000 are available every year and we can actually track what is going on with the economy by attracting one happens with that "every year.

"toughst time we saw the not get it immediately upon the -- quota not get immediately is in april of 2008. my immediate reaction was, uh-o h, economy is in trouble and sure enough, later that year, everything tanks. for the first time this year since 2008, we ran out of visas on the first day of application. that tells me that the economy is picking up. there is a lot of early economic indicators that are officially used for it in my lot of work, the h1b quota the best early economic indicator. host: in "politico" --

guest: it's an interesting dynamic. there is some abuse in the h1b system but not as much as people think. one of the dynamics we see and there have been reports about it is more and more companies that are not in the it business have totally gotten out of it rather than try to do their own technology. they reach outside the company and hire others to come in on a contract basis. it is not their core competency. you then have a lot of computer companies specialize in providing it serve us as to other companies that to other things. -- services to other companies and do other things for these

companies are petitioning for a lot of h1b's. we find any occupation that involves science,ath, engiin if you look at u.s. universities and you go to the graduations and master's ph.d. programs, you will hear a lot of asian-sounding names. many if not more foreign students graduating from universities as we do u.s. students. when companies go to recruit in the tactical field, they wind up with a whole bunch of foreign students and they are qualified people. they need to petition for the h1b's it winds up being that microsoft and intel and the big computer companies higher it people and hire a certain number of h1b's but so do it companies. says specialty

occupation worker and fashion model of distinguished merit. why did they separate fashion models from everyone else and determines whether this model has distinguished merit? is it isl i can say the law. back in 1990, the alphabet soup was rearranged a little bit. when i got to the end of the rearrangement, they had a problem. they had met a category for fashion models. we did not know where to put them so we put them over there with the h1b's./ who determines that? ands the u.s. citizenship immigration service which determines these work-authorized category. that is the agency that says yes or no whether somebody can get

that particular the set. -- visa. you provide evidence that this model is of distinguished merit decides whether they agree. host: our next call is from florida on airline for democrats. caller: thank you. could you speak to the student s on a visa and their involvement using fraud and coercion and sex trafficking american students on our campuses? guest: i'm not sure what you're referring to host: will no longer have that calls a let's move onto howard in leesburg, va., on our line for republicans. caller: thank you for taking my call. i apologize, i am a mobile.

i have a stepson. his father is on a green card and she is married to me for the past six years. orhas been denied a viwsa three times. -- i reade first time a letter telling them that i am retired military and he is coming to visit his mom and he will be under our control and everything. they denied him the second time and i don't think he really wanted to apply a third time. one thing they told him was that you have to have a steady job, there is nothing saying you would not take a job and not come back. butad a mark against him that mark was false. en he went back and told them

it was a mistake, they still did not change anything. on the facteaned that he needed to have a permanent residence but he was moving around back and forth. the city had to have a steady job. could you speak to that? stepson'm assuming your is adults? caller: yes. host: is he still here? caller: he is an audio engineer in brazil. guest: he is trying -- it sounds like he is trying to get a visitor's visa to visit you and your wife. -- i wasem is discussing the resumption of emigrant intense. that presumptions says we think you are going to come here and

try to stayere permanently unless you can prove to us otherwise. because he is trying to get a temporary visa, they are looking at all the facts that would say he would go back to his home country. they are weighing the fact that he has a mother who is a permanent resident which would be a draw fa for him to stay in the united states. him to show them what he has to go back to in his own you need to show you have a job in that country. and janitah show you have a good job. -- and you need to show you have a good job or that you owned a home or that you are married to somebody who wants to stay in that country. you have to show that you are -- at the end of your time and united states -- are going to go back home. it sou like they have concluded that he has not shown

enough evidence to go back. host: crystal williams is talking about the u.s. travelers visaworks. thanks for being on the program. coming up on "washington journal," the washington post danielle douglas. april 27.aturday, we will be right back. ♪ ♪ married at the age of 16 and helped teach her husband to be a better reader and writer. during the civil war, she sneaked supplies to unionists in

the tennessee mountains but by the time her husband assumes the presidency, shes inor help and secludes herself to a second-floor room in the white house. meet elisa johnson, wife of the 17th president, andrew johnson as we continue our series on first ladies. you can join in the conversation monday night live at 9:00 eastern. span, before on c- the white house correspondents' dinner tonight, we will show selected dinners from the past three administrations starting saturday at 3:00 p.m. eastern and our live coverage of this year's dinner starting with the red carpet arrivals. sunday, the dedication of the george w. bush library and museum. >> franklin roosevelt once described the dedication of the library as an act of faith. i dedicate this library with an unshakable faith in the future of our country. it is the hon. lifetime to lead

a untry as brave and as noble as the united states. whatever challenges come before us, i will always believe our nation's best days lie ahead. god bless. [applause] >> sunday morning at 10:30. donovantv this weekend, campbell of leading a platoon of marines in iraq sunday night at 8:00 and on c-span 3, reconsidering the insanity trial of mary todd lincoln sunday at 4:00. into the in and walked little kiosk and i said i am here to report. the guard came up and he said i knew one of your campaign managers in ohio. i said ok and got down in there. the guard said here, you have some hate mail from california. they gave me the mail.

you go through the embarrassing part of the stripped down. then i got into the intake, walked into prison, down into the court, the warden told the man supposed to take me around to get away from him. heeps -- he said i could get away on my arm and i did not allow where i was going. they called a close pajama pants. another prisoner asked where my escort was. i said some little guy in a suit yelled some foul language. he took me in the back way of a larger room. i walked in and a man is sitting there and he said, "are you the congressman?" i said i used to be. he asked if i was a republican. i saireans put me in here. he said i was the mayor of east cleveland, welcome. >> more with the author of"

sideswiped," sunday night on "q &a. >\ host: daniel douglas reports for "the washington post," and is here to talk about the consumer protection bureau's semiannual report and white house republicans say the director recent appointment was constitutionally invalid. the house side block his testimony earlier this week. welcome to the program. guest: thank you for having me. host: remind us of a consumer financial protection europe came into being. guest: it comes out of the 2010 dodd-frank legislation which was an overhaul looking at the various elements of the financial crisis. as aole was to perform middleman for consumers, to allow them to access the best parts of the financial system without having to deal with the

abuses that ran rampant during the crisis. elizabeth warren, was now the senator from massachusetts, came up with the idea at the time and proposed it in a way that was interested and she negotiated the best ways of runnihe re. unfortunately, she was not nominated to run the bureau because her appointment created a lot of political uproar. richard court jury was nominated by the president to take that position. host: as of yet, mr. cordray has not been confirmed by the senate? guest: he has not added has been 20 months. host: is the holdup? guest: the senate republicans and a general matter republicans were not happy about the structure of the bureau. there were hoping the bureau have a five-member commission rather than a single director. there were hoping the bureau would have to go to congress rather than the federal reserve for its appropriations. that is not the way it works.

senate democrats are saying this is something you should have negotiated at the time the bure wated it is to lead this point that senate republicans at this juncture we're not going to confirm anyone until the structure of the bureau is changed to make it more accountable and transparent. cordra wasy able to testify earlier this week in front of the senate banking committee, he was not permitted to testify in front of the house committee. else about that. guest: the german on the house side said richard cordray's nomination is not constitutional based on the district court of appeals back in january. it said three of the president's appointments during appointments duringperiod which is when mr. cordray came in, those

appointments were unconstitutional. there is a separate court case pending using the same arguments to unseat tocordray and turned over most of dodd- frank. until he is confirmed by the senate, they say he has no standing. representative hensarling is chairman of the house financial-services committee and he sent this letter on april 22 saying the committee cannot legally accept testimony from consumerordray on the financial protection bureau's semiannual report on -- until he ys valley appointed -- validl appointed.

talk to us a little more about the specifics of what kind of oversight be cfpb has. guest: it probably has one of the bras are results of the financial market. it can oversee non-financial players like payday lenders, check cashing stores, debt collectors, credit reporting bureaus but it also has provision over some of bigger banks. many of their supervision was banks a $10 billion or more in assets and what they do in terms of mortgage lending and paid a landing. it is becoming a growing business for a lot of large banks. there has been concern among industry groups that the cfcb

would supersede somef the existing regulation but thus far, the industry has responded favorably to the rules that the bureau has issued. host: we are talking with danielle douglas of "the washington post." she is a financial reporter to talk was about the consumer financial protection bureau. if you want to get involved in the conversation, the numbers are on your screen. you can also send as messages on twitter and facebook and an e- mail. funds,we get to the let's take a look at an article you wrote earlier this week regarding regulators set to rein in banks on pay day lending.

the rules are slated to come up thursday could radically alter the operations of the small but growing number of banks including wells fargo and u.s. bancorp that offered loans tied to anticipated direct deposits of salary. guest: it is an interesting business. wells fargo has probably been the one bank in the business longer desperate 1994 is when they started offering this product called a direct deposit advance. it works like a paid day loan. you are promised to repay this loan as soon as your next deposit goes into your account. everyoblem is, often, $100 you bar, you are charged $10. interest ratenual of 300% that regulators are concerned that banks of the ones

getting into this business. with banks being in this part of the business, they are regulated. consumers are afforded certain protection as opposed to the folks going to and it will -- individual members are not. is involved,cfpb there will be more of a level playing field. as for right now, they want to make sure banks are not taking advantage of consumers. the office of the comptroller of the currency is what i am talking about. host: our first call comes from canton, mississippi, an airline for democrats. withr: i am concerned bankruptcy. kept alone and i

escalating so i could not pay it. they have taken me out of bankruptcy. i don't know what i'm supposed to do. about what's interesting the beer as they allow consumers like the caller to issue complaints. they will put much broker and monitor was going on so that whomever the company is that put you into bankruptcy that you might be dealing with, you will be able to lead the bureau contact them and follow up and make sure they can resolve your dispute. it is smart to give the bureau a call and have them get involved. they have received about 100,000 complaints to date since they opened in july, 2011. minneapolis, val, minn., on our line for independents. caller: thank you, cspan. i have a question. why is our president allowing them to basically said that the

consumer protection service bureau are illegitimate. a director, the organiza cannot function. why isn't the president doing something about that? the other question is -- you said that wells fargo has been running the space center's and you are right but the thing is this -- the public does not know that if it is not require that wells fargo says that this is a pay day center. i am a customer of wells fargo bank and when i go to the big bang, there is nothing listed anywhere even on their literature that you get is a customer. you don't get anything that says, by the way, we do payday services. not required that wells fargo, like that promoter other services, why isn't it required that they post that

everywhere? you could say that wells fargo has been running the since 1994 but the general public may not know that. one of the things that is interesting is as much as cfpb needs a director. but for the most part, the bureau can operate without mr. cordray. still has the ability to do day to day operations. the president wanted to make sure he was able to write the rules as required by dodd-frank which is why he did the appointment. as to the second question, with wells fargo, since they don't call a paid day lending, customers may not realize that is what it is. on their website, th sometimes promoted depending on what

customer it is. they might say that you could be interested in direct deposit advance or take a look at our mortgage products. they tend to advertise based on the demographics of their customers. some customers might not see these marketing tools but others might host: here is a suite -- --et it's not so much that the republicans don't want the cfpb but they believe the decisions handed down by them after the appointment thecordray are invalid because of the supreme court decision? guest: terminate republicans that believe that. they want the cfpb to be set up like the sec with members of both parties appointed to the board so there will not be a political bent either way. critics say the sec is stalemated because of the

structure and unable to get a lot of things done. that is debatable but so far, the cfpb has been ensuring they can write as many roles as they are supposed to and get their mandate out. host: our next call comes from charlie in el centro, calif., on our line for independents. caller: thank you so much for cspan. am in withment i wells fargo is over a three-day holiday weekend last year, i had a secured the said that credit card and a checking account. about $3 shy of $50 in each account. a check went through there for $50 and wells fargo bounced the check from the checking account, asking for a cash advance from

the visa card with fees involved. creditard issued a $50 fee they put me on notice that we needed to make a payment. was $50 plus the $50 fate and it went back and forth 11 times over the three-day holiday weekend when i got there tuesday morning, i went to the loan officer or assistant manager of the bank. i said something is going on. andsaid i owe them a $1,100 there's nothing we can do. i deposited my social security and than i did not do it. seven months later, they offered to make a settlement for $200. consumers are supposed to

be able to opt in or opt out of overdraft. a lot of consers ke the caller caid the fact that there are still getting hit with overdraft fees. concernedre becoming about this. they want to major banks are offering proper disclosure to all of their customers. you don't have to overdraft. if you come across a situation where you have a transaction and you don't have sufficient funds, you should be blocked. that is one thing they're working on to ensure there is proper disclosure because there are still many banks collecting overdraft fees. host: want to correct a statement i made earlier about the supreme court making this decision. it was actually a federal appeals court ruling. missouri, on our line for democrats. caller: good morning.

cspan is great. a want to thank you for taking my call. i had a question in regard to employment and credit. --it possible for employer employment based on credit history -- how can they do that? guest: it is illegal for employers to pull your credit history. that is another thing the bureau is looking into. the credit reporting side is accurate. one of the things they found is that credit reports sometimes have lots of errors. if the employer or even a landlord is pulling your credit history and seeing these marks that you might not have incurred, that could make it more difficult for you to get a job or rent an apartment or get

a loan. that is something they are starting to deal with. host: our next call is from winchester, va., our republican line. caller: i have two quick questions. why are mainstream banks starting to get into the payday loan systems when those systems are known to be predatory in nature? also, what is the cfpb doing to promote mainstream banking in the areas where the payday launceston has taken off and those folks cannot afford it? isst: the argument of banks they want to offer the full range of services to their customers. many times, these are small value loans, a $500 cap on these loans if you have a quick car repair or need to cover an expense. you might have anticipated these expenses of a want to offer that for their consumers.

still a small percentage of banks that are in this it right now, six large banks, wells fargo, region's bank, bank of oklahoma are playing in the space but many banks are leery because of the historical perception of payday loans and because of the potential risks. it is not a market that might not explode regulators want to make sure these banks are not taking advantage. with the occ, they were planning to issue that update to their roles since 2001. at that time, the regulators had realized that banks were sponsoring some of the storefront payday lenders. regulators were not happy about that. they issued guidance that you cannot issue direct payday loans. some banks circumvented that role by saying that they are not paid the loans.

they are direct deposit advances so we are well within our rights. host: we've got a tweet -- this process that mainstream a way tos this wa circumvent and places like north carolina? guest: a day lending is illegal in 15 states. whether -- where it is legal, there are so many restrictions. repayment rules to make sure the camera -- consumer can repay. federal regulators are now saying we will take our cues what the states are doing. we will limit the number of loans that to be taken out within a month or eight pay period. what also happens as consumers and of taking out more of these loans because they cannot necessarily cover the first one.

it becomes a snowball effect. there was a study this week looking at the payday industry and they found that the average consumer was taking out 10 loans per year. host: earlier this week, richard cordray testified before the senate banking committee, addressing concerns over data gathering, stressing that all information gathered is -- is anonymous. we will look at what he has to say. [video clip] >> i think this is an important difference. by that you mean we are getting information about whether richard cordray paying his mortgage and when and how, that is not the way the day to work. we're getting information about mortgage and other performance over time goes but

it is anonymous. host: what is this information and the cfpb gathering power they using it? guest: it has always been a very data-driven models. they want to do studies and gather information about how consumers are interacting with the financial markets. this data collection ever is to track consumer behavior. -- how folks are shopping for mortgages and using credit cards and how they deal with overdraft on checking accounts. are collecting this anonymous data which means there is nothing identifiable in terms of your name or social security number -- no information the average person would not want to be able to be seen. they are getting some of this from data services. they are also requesting record from banks to get a better sense as to how the average person is dealing with the financial industry. the perceived threat was that

folks would be able to hack formation. mr. crodray said this is anonymous. there's nothing anyone can use to tap into your account for find out any information about you. host: we've got another call from adam in louisiana, on our line for independents. caller: good morning. against amplaint mortgage company who implied i was over 120 days leg with a pimmit which was false. they received three payments from me. my work had gotten slow but i got them the three pennants and they tell me that everything was fine. 28 days later, i received a phone call telling me i was in foreclosure.

they said have a good day. and ilained to cfpb stated my complaint in detail. they got back with me maybe 90 days later and said they found the company that i complained about. they said they are not at fault and they closed my case. i told the representative of cfpb that i could prove my case and they basically kicked me out. i am just at a loss. host: are you finished? caller: yes. guest: that is one line of defense but not the only one. they would recommend to you to that couldattorney

help someone in your situation to ensure that your not placed into foreclosure. it is one thing for them to make that decision but it certainly is not the end of the road. it is not the last resort. host: here is a tweet -- who are these companies and that -- and are the regulated by the cfpb? guest: yes, debt collectors are regulated by the cfpb they are gathering information about how best to regulate them to supervise their activities. can go to any of the credit reporting bureaus and pull your data. they can use them within their claims but the cfp isb looking at that to ensure that what they

are doing is not illegal. they want to insure that they are not creating more problems for consumers. many consumers say that as was happening. host: another tweet -- guest: they do in this sense of mortgage rules. also, the financial products that the smaller banks and credit unions may issue. in terms of the direct deposit onlyng, the cfpb is responsible -- responsible for banks of $10 billion or more of assets. there are different rules for smaller banks. host: our next call comes from stafford, va., on our line for democrats. caller: good morning. i am in a business where a poll

credit on a regular basis. i see people that are being hurt by predatory lenders that are making loans like payday loans. these people are going paycheck to paycheck. afford to pay their pay day loan and make payments other than their outstanding debts. it is just a continual thing. and theyhem cannot peg are going into the credit bureau with a negative. it hurts their credit. the day, the government was going after these so-called mobsters that were doing the same thing, basically loansharking.

they used drasticto collect their money. the banks are just a little bit lighter but they are still hurting your credit. isn't that the same thing, legalized loansharking? host: what kind of business are you end that you check credit references? caller: i am in automobile financing. we have to review their credit before they are given a loan. are hurt by those little things in there. guest: definitely -- paydayf what occurs in lending is very questionable. it is sometimes unscrupulous. there are standards and not all pay lenders engaged in the kinds of abusive practices that hurt consumers. the idea is to level the playing field and insure that the guy in the storefront and wells fargo are operating at the same level. they don't want them to charge excessive fees and fully

disclosing to consumers. when you are desperate and need money, you are not necessarily paying attention to the fine print. what many consumer groups would say is that all the fine print should be easily accessible and laid out for you. that way you can compare the two products from a wells fargo too storefront and get a sense of taking out a long that will have fees. the likelihood of repaying it will not be that high based upon my salary. federal regulators were trying to insure that banks have a repayment process or telling consumers that we are not sure, based on your income, that you will be able to repay this and this is a sustainable way free to borrow money. it is about making sure that the playing field is fully level across the board whether it is large banks were small guys to make sure there are consumers that have different marks on their credit reports.

host: what elements of the c fpb annual report seems to be getting the most attention on capitol hill? guest: it is the data collection aspect. the biggest part of the actual report focused on the consumer complaints database they have which is extensive. the bureau decides to extend its up it not only covers mortgages and credit cards but also bank accounts and it looks at student loans and, of course, because there is still homeowners that are hurt, 50% of the complaints based receive or about mortgages. the next 20% was about credit cards. some people were foreclosed upon unbeknownst to them. they thought their fully paid up. they're having trouble receiving a loan modification. with credit cards, a lot of it is not being fully aware of the full disclosure. so much of the attention was on

the data collection side that the employee database was overlooked and that is extensive. host: our next call comes from iron river, mich. on airline for independents. of ther: if you go out united states and you can help us with the $192 billion of money the drug cartel is tied to the banks -- ost: how much does the cfpb have on money-laundering? guest: not as much as the federal regulators. they have been looking into the money laundering issue as the caller mentionedhsbc was a huge bank that was brought in because of its alleged it money- laundering from mexican drug cartels. there was no jail time but they got some fines. and number of banks have come across these issues and some of

them occur because the banks are thatlagging to regulators this particular transaction looks suspicious. it is little things like that. there are not as night cases as hsbc where there is actual cartel money running for the system. it is lots of little things that could be suspicious. host: danielle douglas is the "washington post"banking and financial reporter. she reported on the retail and hospitality industries and the washington, d.c. area. our next call comes from lake zurich, ill., on our line for republicans. good morning. question andick maybe you can clear the air. manyw there has been

foreclosures on mortgages and people are under water. there is still quite a few out there. is there anything that will happen in the near future or is there something already happening to people under water but current with their mortgages? maybe you can explain what they are doing for people who are not current and under water. what do you think should happen or is there a plan to have something for people who are current? hamp there is the program that came out of the treasury program to ensure that folks who are struggling to meet their payments were not going to end up in foreclosure. if there were delinquent, the banks that issue their mortgage would try to work on some kind of modification that would help them to be able to become

current. there are lots of individual private programs that many of the banks are engaging in an the other part is that many of the banks who had to settle reason for closure settlements, one of the big ones is the $25 billion national mortgage settlement which involved j.p. morgan, wells fargo, i think, a citibank and allied financial. they are helping homeowners who may not have received the best care when it came to foreclosure are having issues with their homes. they are now trying to rework it through modifications. the other portion is the $9 billion settlement that the federal regulators were able to broker with about 13 mortgage servicing companies. they are also supposed to institute some help to homeowners who are struggling in the form of principle reductions and interest rate to -- reductions. a lot of folks eligible for these have probably already found out about that.

others may want to contact local housing counselors to see if they might be eligible for some assistance under any of these settlements. there are a few of them coming out of the crisis and a lot of them and to try to help people having trouble with their mortgages. host: here is a tweet -- thatst: there is disclosure all payday lenders are supposed to offer to their consumers to make sure they know what they're getting into. cfpb is looking at simplifying the disclosure. when you open a checking account or look at financial products, there are 20 or 30 pages of brochure you get with it that most people do not recur. consumer advocates would like to

see those disclosures whittled down to one or two pages and offer an easier way for consumers to figure out if they can take these products. host: next up is for fourth, texas, on our line for democrats. caller: good morning, my question is for the elderly. it is kind of aside from the payday landing. a lot of elderly have their checks automatically deposited. the third are paid on or the first or whatever. chaseas been happening at bank specifically is they are holding on to that money and then deposited it into the elderly account of what ever day it is. are they collecting interest on that money while they hold it? that could be in the billions. why has not somebody did something about it? is looking at

the way banks treat elderly customers and making sure they are not being taken advantage out. i'm a certain how chase's operating on the release of funds when you deposit your checks. if you are experiencing that, you should contact the consumer bureau to ensure you are not being taken advantage out. florida, on our line for independents. caller: good morning. i have a question to ask. this is a reference to catalogs being sent to you for credit. ofave been getting day raft them again. i applied for a credit card recently. it is the first when i applied for 4 years and i was denied. the reason was i had applied for too much credit -- too many credit applications in the past month or so.

was a short period of time. senterstand these catalogs you a preapproved and that goes to your credit score or what ever. there is a record of that. is there anything we can do about that? guest: you are correct, every time you open a line of credit or there is an inquiry to your credit, that is a knock against your credit score. i am not aware of anything that is being done in order to address that. i do note that the bureau is looking at how some of the credit reporting agencies handle these sorts of things and whether they are being fully transparent and accessible for consumers. host: danielle douglas of "the washington post." our line is next on

for republicans. caller: good morning. these people that want home mortgages and don't qualify are worried about making payments, i think the government is not helping them. obviously, they're not working hard enough for saving enough money to buy a home so what is wrong with renting? the government does not have to control tghe loans. the person they're renting from will either say that you -- that they can stay there or you could make up next month. host: we will leave it there. danielle douglas, talk to us about what the cfpb does to protect potential homeowners. guest: they instituted a qualified mortgage rule which allows for banks are lenders have to ensure that customers have the ability to repay the loan and part of that is

instituting a debt to income ratio. your debt can be no more than 43% never did come. with that kind of magic, they are trying to make sure you can cover -- but that kind of metric, they are trying to make sure you can cover your lawn. many homeowners who find themselves in trouble, at one point, were able to pay their mortgages and perhaps fell into trouble that made it more difficult. it is interesting to see whether their lenders are willing to work with them. the government and many consumer groups think banks should be willing to modify loans and work with customers especially if they have a proven record of being able to meet their payments. host: daniel douglas is a financial reporter with "the financial post" and has been talking about the consumer financial protection bureau. you can follow her on twitter, thanks for being on the program.

this is what is coming up on tomorrow's edition of "washington journal." we began with david williams, the former fbi investigator talking to us about the fbi investigation into the boston marathon bombing. later on, we'll check in checkbuzz feed and politico to discuss this week in washington and what happened on capitol hill and at the white house. we will wrap up the program with william pomerantz, the acting director at the woodrow wilson center to talk to us in light of the bombings in boston and the rising tensions in syria about the ongoing relationship between the united states and russia. we want to thank everyone who has watched and participated in this edition of "washington journal we will see you tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern time. [captioning performed by

national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> up next, president obama discusses a new education initiative at the white house science fair. after that, the 2013 teacher of the year. first senator speeches by signature heitkamp. >> it to cars pull someone has a stranger and the other as dick cheney, you get in the car with the stranger. >> if you took all the money republicans